Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

When Gallup set out recently to poll Baghdad residents, the biggest surprise may have been the public's reaction to the questioners: Almost everyone responded to the pollsters' questions, with some pleading for a chance to give their opinions.

"The interviews took more than an hour to do, people were extremely cooperative with open-ended questions," said Richard Burkholder, director of international polling for Gallup. "People went on and on."

But many of those Iraqis still have sharply mixed feelings about the U.S. military presence.

The Gallup poll found that 71 percent of the capital city's residents felt U.S. troops should not leave in the next few months. Just 26 percent felt the troops should leave that soon.

However, a sizable minority felt that circumstances could occur in which attacks against the troops could be justified. Almost one in five, 19 percent, said attacks could be justified, and an additional 17 percent said they could be in some situations.

These mixed feelings in Baghdad come at a time when many in the United States are urging that the troops be brought home soon.

Almost six in 10 in the poll, 58 percent, said that U.S. troops in Baghdad have behaved fairly well or very well, with one in 10 saying "very well." Twenty 20 percent said the troops have behaved fairly badly and 9 percent said very badly.

Gallup, one of the nation's best-known polling operations, hired more than 40 questioners, mostly Iraqi citizens directed by survey managers who have helped with other Gallup polling in Arab countries. Respondents were told the poll was being done for media both in Iraq and outside their country, but no mention was made that the American polling firm was running it.

To conduct the poll, Gallup did interviews face-to-face in people's homes chosen at random from all geographic sectors of the city, and more than nine in 10 agreed to participate, at least double the response rate for many U.S. telephone polls. Pollsters in the United States have an increasingly difficult time getting cooperation from people called on the phone.

"This is the way we did polling in the United States before telephone ownership got to the point that we could do reliable phone surveys," Burkholder said in an interview with The Associated Press. The poll of 1,178 adults was taken between Aug. 28 and Sept. 4 and had a margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.

Burkholder said Gallup plans to do further polling in Baghdad in coming months and hopes eventually to expand throughout Iraq. Gallup plans to release much of the data through its subscription service, the Gallup Poll Tuesday Briefing.

Gallup started its operation in Baghdad because it felt Baghdad would have the lowest security risks after the war, but that hasn't turned out to be the case, Burkholder said. Six in 10 Baghdad residents said that within the past four weeks they had been afraid at times to go outside their homes during the day.

--------------------You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers

Im not surprised they dont want the troops to leave too quickly. At the moment they are the only valid form of peace keeping/Law enforcement. That does not mean the same percentage wanted them their in the first place or supported the invasion. Its a shame they didnt ask that question, it would have been interesting to see the results.

Quote: Almost six in 10 in the poll, 58 percent, said that U.S. troops in Baghdad have behaved fairly well or very well, with one in 10 saying "very well." Twenty 20 percent said the troops have behaved fairly badly and 9 percent said very badly.

That reflects quite badly on the US military I think. If 30% feels they have behaved badly that is quite a high figure. Ideally it should be alot lower.

Quote: To conduct the poll, Gallup did interviews face-to-face in people's homes chosen at random from all geographic sectors of the city, and more than nine in 10 agreed to participate, at least double the response rate for many U.S. telephone polls. Pollsters in the United States have an increasingly difficult time getting cooperation from people called on the phone.

How many times do you get called on the phone or accosted in the street to take part in some pointless survey? That explains why its so hard to get people to take part in surveys in the US but in Iraq this could well be the first time many of these people have ever had the chance to air their views to any kind of official body. No wonder they are jumping at the chance. And before anyone jumps on this, although this is a good thing I dont believe the right to take part in largely pointless surveys in anyway justifies Operation Iraqi Freedom.

Quote: Im not surprised they dont want the troops to leave too quickly. At the moment they are the only valid form of peace keeping/Law enforcement. That does not mean the same percentage wanted them their in the first place or supported the invasion. Its a shame they didnt ask that question, it would have been interesting to see the results.

Im sure a lot of people would have supported the invasion, sadly people in mass-graves can't voice their opinions...

Quote: That reflects quite badly on the US military I think. If 30% feels they have behaved badly that is quite a high figure. Ideally it should be alot lower.

I agree.

--------------------The punishment which the wise suffer, who refuse to take part in government, is to live under the government of worse men.

If only Reagan and Bush had felt that way 20 years ago instead of propping him up and supporting him in the Iran-Iraq war.

I'm afraid invading countries who pose no threat whatsoever to you because you want a pal in power sets a terrible precedent. We supported Saddam for years because we thought he was our pal. Who'se betting our next pal won't be every bit as bad?

If only Reagan and Bush had felt that way 20 years ago instead of propping him up and supporting him in the Iran-Iraq war.

he'd have been around just the same even if we hadn't. we didn't "prop him up" at all. all he got was a little covert assistance.

I'm afraid invading countries who pose no threat whatsoever to you because you want a pal in power sets a terrible precedent.

i think iraq did pose a threat. at the very least, i don't think it can be said that they posed "no threat whatsoever". i very much doubt that hussein was through with his quest for weapons and power. i don't think we were wrong to remove him.

Who'se betting our next pal won't be every bit as bad?

that's a good question. we'll see what this whole thing means for iraq, politically, in the months to come. i am convinced that if their leaders are democratically elected and constitutionally limited, they cannot ever be nearly as bad as the ba'ath administration.

Quote:Learyfan said:Who gives a shit if they're happy that our soldiers are there?

You really can't think of anypeople or groups of people? I'm surprised.

Quote:The point is is that the tab for this pointless war will be picked up by me and YOU.

Pointless? Hmmm.

Quote: If the happiness of these people helps you justify the war then so be it,

There's nothing for me to justify. I repeatedly stated I hoped we wouldn't go in. I sent no-one in.

Quote:but my question is......... WHAT ABOUT US!??!?!?!

What?

--------------------You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers

It would be great if we could liberate everyone who lives under a repressive regime, but we CAN'T. So it's pointless to spend an incredible amount of OUR money to make such a small impact.

It just seems like you and Wingnutx and the others are looking for some reason to feel good about this war. There is no reason to feel good about this war. We have a lot of problems and a lot of people HERE that could really use all this money Bush is using on Iraq.

Also, I feel we are in Iraq for impure reasons, but that's another story.

It would be great if we could liberate everyone who lives under a repressive regime, but we CAN'T. So it's pointless to spend an incredible amount of OUR money to make such a small impact.

It just seems like you and Wingnutx and the others are looking for some reason to feel good about this war. There is no reason to feel good about this war. We have a lot of problems and a lot of people HERE that could really use all this money Bush is using on Iraq.

Also, I feel we are in Iraq for impure reasons, but that's another story.

It'd be great if we could help out all of the poor people in America, without costing us more money, but we can't, so lets just let them starve.

Right?

--------------------In response to an attack killing 15 American Servicemen
PsiloKitten said:
Just give em a little more time, the iraqis are making great progress. And this is unorganized. Wait till they get organized.

Quote:Alex123 said:If only Reagan and Bush had felt that way 20 years ago instead of propping him up and supporting him in the Iran-Iraq war.

Well, if the queen had balls, she'd be the king

"IF" Saddam didn't use these weapons to gas innocent people ..."IF" Iran wasn't percieved as a bigger threat to us..."IF" we just let these tyrannical despots continue their massive assaults against human rights and freedoms

Wow, the if game is fun!

"IF" we could wave a magic wand..this is neato-mosquito!

--------------------In response to an attack killing 15 American Servicemen
PsiloKitten said:
Just give em a little more time, the iraqis are making great progress. And this is unorganized. Wait till they get organized.

What?? No, my point is let's help OUR poor people first before we spend all of this money on Iraq under the quise of [jerk off gesture]"helping those people"[/jerk off gesture].

I can't believe that people who understand that our politicians are completely full of shit when they say they're locking up drug users "because we care", can't see the same bullshit lie being used for the Iraq situation.

Quote:Learyfan said:Who gives a shit if they're happy that our soldiers are there?

The point is is that the tab for this pointless war will be picked up by me and YOU. If the happiness of these people helps you justify the war then so be it, but my question is.........

WHAT ABOUT US!??!?!?!

I totally agree. I think that we should present the new Iraqi' leaders with a bill for both having to defeat them in Gulf War I, and fro liberating them. And what better way to pay us than in texas tea

--------------------In response to an attack killing 15 American Servicemen
PsiloKitten said:
Just give em a little more time, the iraqis are making great progress. And this is unorganized. Wait till they get organized.

It would be great if we could liberate everyone who lives under a repressive regime, but we CAN'T. So it's pointless to spend an incredible amount of OUR money to make such a small impact.

I don't think it'd be great at all.

{quote]It just seems like you and Wingnutx and the others are looking for some reason to feel good about this war.

A perfect example of why it's foolish to make assumptions.

Quote: There is no reason to feel good about this war.

While I still wish we hadn't gone in, are you saying that removing a scumbag like Saddam isn't a good thing?

Quote: We have a lot of problems and a lot of people HERE that could really use all this money Bush is using on Iraq. {/quote]Umm, no. The money should be given back to thge taxpayers who earned it in the first place. It should not be given or used to help those who have not.

--------------------You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers

The problems we have are directly related to givng handouts to people, to short prison terms, to our "blame others" mentality, to a lack of personal responsibility, to high taxes, to the government trying to stick their fucking noses where they don't belong, to illegal immigration, to bad gun laws, to low standards in schools, to so many fucking things it's not funny. To the liberal mindset. (not exclusivly)

To say there is no justification is just foolish. Had you said that despite the justification we still shouldn't have gone in, I'd most likely agree.

Quote: I think you guys know it was a mistake, and you're trying to find some justification for what we got ourselves into.

When you get a day job, don't give it up as you suck at trying to see what I think.

--------------------You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers